March 4th, 2008
- Collection
- Digests of Decisions
- Country
- Case number
- Judge
- Key terms
- Upstream post
- 6399
- AKN IRI
- /akn/ecsc/ecsc/digest/2008/digest/march-4-2008/post-6399
-
6399-1361815284_magicfields_pdf_file_upload_1_1.pdf current 2026-06-21 03:45:09.564195+00 · 21,448 B
CHAMBER HEARING Tuesday 4th March 2008 CORAM Hon. Denys Barrow SC Justice of Appeal SAINT LUCIA Case Name Anselma Ivinia Augustin v Columbian Emeralds International Ltd. [Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2008] Appearances Appellant Mr. Horace Fraser Respondent Mr. Mark Maragh Issue:
1.Application to list matter as a summary appeal
2.Application to admit fresh evidence Result: Both applications were refused. Liberty, to respondent to file a further affidavit in reply, if necessary, by 14th March 2008. Parties are to file skeleton arguments on the application, not exceeding 3 pages plus photocopies of authorities, not later than 31st march. Appellant is to prepare a separate bundle for this application. Costs of $1, 000.00 to the respondent. Reason: 1. The Rules do not permit one side, in the face of opposition by the other side, to have an appeal proceed as a summary appeal. Accordingly, the respondent having objected, the application is refused. 2. Secondly, the matter of receiving fresh evidence is a matter for the full court that will hear the appeal, to decide. The application to adduce fresh evidence shall be set for hearing by the full court at the sitting when the substantive appeal comes on.
Chamber Hearing Saint Lucia Tuesday 4th March, 2008
PDF extraction
CHAMBER HEARING Tuesday 4th March 2008 CORAM Hon. Denys Barrow SC Justice of Appeal SAINT LUCIA Case Name Anselma Ivinia Augustin v Columbian Emeralds International Ltd. [Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2008] Appearances Appellant Mr. Horace Fraser Respondent Mr. Mark Maragh Issue:
1.Application to list matter as a summary appeal
2.Application to admit fresh evidence Result: Both applications were refused. Liberty, to respondent to file a further affidavit in reply, if necessary, by 14th March 2008. Parties are to file skeleton arguments on the application, not exceeding 3 pages plus photocopies of authorities, not later than 31st march. Appellant is to prepare a separate bundle for this application. Costs of $1, 000.00 to the respondent. Reason: 1. The Rules do not permit one side, in the face of opposition by the other side, to have an appeal proceed as a summary appeal. Accordingly, the respondent having objected, the application is refused. 2. Secondly, the matter of receiving fresh evidence is a matter for the full court that will hear the appeal, to decide. The application to adduce fresh evidence shall be set for hearing by the full court at the sitting when the substantive appeal comes on.
WordPress
CHAMBER HEARING Saint Lucia Tuesday 4th March 2008
| Run | Started | Status | Method | Paragraphs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16824 | 2026-06-21 17:57:09.382177+00 | ok | pymupdf_layout_text | 3 |
| 7486 | 2026-06-21 08:20:15.421097+00 | ok | pymupdf_text | 17 |